|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:13 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
But I'd say your standard is as bad as any other. Instead of imperfect, arbitrary legal standards that are just going to lead to injustices, why not just examine each case on its merits? |
It's the law. You need a black and white standard, arbitrary as it may be. I'm all for some judicial wiggle room, but there needs to be an established no-go zone. |
I respectfully disagree. It's a bad law. One size does not fit all. (Oops!  NPI!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
But I'd say your standard is as bad as any other. Instead of imperfect, arbitrary legal standards that are just going to lead to injustices, why not just examine each case on its merits? |
It's the law. You need a black and white standard, arbitrary as it may be. I'm all for some judicial wiggle room, but there needs to be an established no-go zone. |
I respectfully disagree. It's a bad law. One size does not fit all. (Oops! NPI!) |
Just as the diagnoses of what makes a pedo isn't exact. If the child is very young, even if having entered puberty, it should still be considered being a pedo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| It's the law. You need a black and white standard, arbitrary as it may be. I'm all for some judicial wiggle room, but there needs to be an established no-go zone. |
I respectfully disagree. It's a bad law. One size does not fit all. (Oops! NPI!) |
The only wiggle room I can imagine is a small difference of age of 5 or less years from the legal age. Someone well into their 20's has no business being with a 15 year old. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
But I'd say your standard is as bad as any other. Instead of imperfect, arbitrary legal standards that are just going to lead to injustices, why not just examine each case on its merits? |
It's the law. You need a black and white standard, arbitrary as it may be. I'm all for some judicial wiggle room, but there needs to be an established no-go zone. |
I respectfully disagree. It's a bad law. One size does not fit all. (Oops! NPI!) |
Just as the diagnoses of what makes a pedo isn't exact. If the child is very young, even if having entered puberty, it should still be considered being a pedo. |
Keep showing that nignance!
The diagnostic criteria for pedophilia are quite specific:
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A
Someone who is primarily sexually and emotionally attracted to individuals already IN puberty exhibits hebephilia. In fact, in the proposed revision to the diagnostic criteria in the upcoming DSM5, the name is to be changed to "Pedohebephilia" with the pedophilic type to be distinguished from the hebephilic type (except in cases of individuals who exhibit both types).
There is quite a bit of controversy surrounding the proposed change. In fact, Richard Green, the man most responsible for getting Homosexuality removed from the DSM in 1975, was moved to publish in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, "Sexual Preference for 14-Year-Olds as a Mental Disorder: You Can't Be Serious!" Indeed, if it goes through, it would have the effect of sexually pathologizing entire countries (including Korea!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's sick that you care so much about pedos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| It's sick that you care so much about pedos. |
Agreed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The fact is that the site you quoted states that if someone fiddles with a child younger than 11, they are a pedo. I've stated that I started puberty at 8 (and finished at 12 or 13). If someone had fiddled with me at 9, even though I was pubescent, they would have been a pedo.
Most people neither know nor differentiate between the medical terms for pre-pubescent and pubescent molestation. If it's a kid, it's WRONG.
Last edited by NYC_Gal on Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's just the psychiatric definition. Legal and social meanings are different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| It's sick that you care so much about pedos. |
So according to you, the best way of addressing the pedophile problem is to remain ignorant about it? NYC_Gal exemplifies this approach in spades! 
But it is fine and upstanding for you to engage in name-calling and ad hominem attacks.  Have you so little self-awareness to the ignorant fool you are making of yourself? And the ninny agreeing with you, too.
So, according to NYC_Gal, the entire psychiatric profession and others are sick. Gee, I wonder which to believe?
| Quote: |
The fact is that the site you quoted states that if someone fiddles with a child younger than 11, they are a pedo. I've stated that I started puberty at 8 (and finished at 12 or 13). If someone had fiddled with me at 9, even though I was pubescent, they would have been a pedo. |
Maybe some of the blame for your ignorance lies in your dyslexia. It does NOT say
| Quote: |
| if someone fiddles with a child younger than 11, they are a pedo. |
The APA clearly states prepubescent is a requirement.
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| Most people neither know nor differentiate between the medical terms for pre-pubescent and pubescent molestation. |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| That's just the psychiatric definition. Legal and social meanings are different. |
Your standard is social or "most people." There is no legal one, AFAIK. Mine is a professional one.
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| If it's a kid, it's WRONG. |
Go by whatever moral code you want. Just because it may not be harmful does not necessarily make it right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Hebephilic Type�Sexually Attracted to Pubescent Children (Generally Age 11 through 14)"
Generally. You know that I was 8. What about a child who starts puberty at 7? 6? Do you truly think a court would argue that he's not a pedo, and only suffering from his hebephilic tendencies? NO! He'd be called a pedo.
I'm not ignorant about the medical condition. You're ignorant about societal codes.
Let me clarify:
It. Is. Sick. To. Fiddle. With. Children.
I hope this helps. I'm tired arguing with a pedo/hebe supporter, so I'm off. You have failed to argue your case successfully. I'm sure you'll need to get the last word, but try typing with both hands this time. <<flounce>>
EDIT: I've reported you to the mods.
Last edited by NYC_Gal on Tue Aug 10, 2010 10:06 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| EDIT: I've reported you to the mods. |
For posting science and news articles? I must have missed that in the ToS.
If anyone deserves to be reported, it is you, at least five times on this thread alone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| That's just the psychiatric definition. Legal and social meanings are different. |
Your standard is social or "most people." There is no legal one, AFAIK. Mine is a professional one. |
My standard is a mental state, not a physical one.
And yes, there is a legal definition. Talk about some "nignance."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2205170
| Quote: |
| Although there is substantial evidence in the historical and anthropological record of the sexual use of children by adults, surprisingly little is known about the etiology of pedophilia or its relation to other forms of sexual aggression. After briefly reviewing the research on pedophilia, we argue that one major difficulty in conducting or interpreting such research lies in the different definitions "pedophilia" has received. Most important, much of the research has accepted a legal definition of pedophilia, treating all offenders convicted of "child molestation" as pedophiles, regardless of the age or appearance of the victim. We argue that a distinction should be made between biological children and sociolegal children. Laws governing child molestation reflect sociolegal childhood, regardless of its discrepancy with biological childhood. "True" pedophiles should be identified by their preference for biological children. By using legal classifications, researchers may well be confusing two distinct types of offenders, child molesters and rapists, and confounding attempts to understand pedophilia. |
Take for example this story:
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/regions/10/22/08/brit-arrested-dumaguete-pedophilia
| Quote: |
The Bureau of Immigration on Wednesday said it has arrested a British national in Dumaguete City for alleged pedophilia.
...
BI intelligence chief Faizal Hussin said Holden allegedly enticed the girls to have sex with him after making false promises of financial support. He said Holden would stop communicating with the victims after they got pregnant. |
Clearly he was arrested for having sex with post-pubescent girls, yet accused of pedophilia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
Also, what does a court have to do with this? Pedophilia is not a crime, but a psychiatric diagnosis, and even that is tenuous.* No one has ever been convicted of pedophilia per se. |
Maybe it's called "sex with a minor" or whatever legalese they use. But it's still pedophilia. And it's still a crime. A simple Google search would bear that out, in case you didn't already know it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
Also, what does a court have to do with this? Pedophilia is not a crime, but a psychiatric diagnosis, and even that is tenuous.* No one has ever been convicted of pedophilia per se. |
Maybe it's called "sex with a minor" or whatever legalese they use. But it's still pedophilia. And it's still a crime. A simple Google search would bear that out, in case you didn't already know it. |
I think he meant that feelings of pedophilia are not criminal. Its not until you touch the kid (or are lured by police to an imaginary kid) that it becomes a crime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| conrad2 wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
Also, what does a court have to do with this? Pedophilia is not a crime, but a psychiatric diagnosis, and even that is tenuous.* No one has ever been convicted of pedophilia per se. |
Maybe it's called "sex with a minor" or whatever legalese they use. But it's still pedophilia. And it's still a crime. A simple Google search would bear that out, in case you didn't already know it. |
I think he meant that feelings of pedophilia are not criminal. Its not until you touch the kid (or are lured by police to an imaginary kid) that it becomes a crime. |
Maybe. It's hard to know what he means when he dances around the subject. But one of the definitions he posted included "The person has acted on these sexual urges." So it's no solely based on feelings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
